Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
To: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
Cc: gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:12:24
Message-Id: 49B7E2DF.60805@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal by Ciaran McCreesh
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:20:25 +0100 > Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: >>>> [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-4.4.0_pre20090310 [from svn master >>>> r12345] >>> That claim right there is enough to show that you haven't thought >>> about this at all. Your proposal is lots of handwaving magic, most >>> of it unimplementable. I suggest you put together a reference >>> implementation before promoting this idea any further. >> What's wrong is U that should be R beside that there isn't much >> magic... > > The U isn't the problem. The svn revision is the problem. You need to > consider how the package manager would get the revision. >
I know, if you are re emerging you have those information, if you are updating you won't have them. That's why either the U or the revision information is wrong. lu -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero